The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 1, October, 1884 eBook

This eBook from the Gutenberg Project consists of approximately 121 pages of information about The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 1, October, 1884.

The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 1, October, 1884 eBook

This eBook from the Gutenberg Project consists of approximately 121 pages of information about The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 1, October, 1884.
Duty and receive Priviledge there, their Neglect of Compliance with the said Order of June 6th 1747, notwithstanding, unless the major Part of the Inhabitants and rateable Estate belonging to said Groton and Nottingham respectively, shall on or before the first Day of September next in writing under their Hands, transmit to the Secretary’s Office their Desire not to continue so incorporated with the town of Dunstable as aforesaid; provided also, That in Case the said Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham shall signify such their Desire in Manner and Time as aforesaid, they be nevertheless subjected to pay and discharge their Proportion of all Publick Town or Ministerial Rates or Taxes hitherto granted or regularly laid on them; excepting the last Sum granted for building a Meeting House.  And that the present Town Officers stand and execute their Offices respectively until the Anniversary Town-Meeting at Dunstable in March next.  Sent up for Concurrence.

[Journal of the House of Representatives (pages 46, 47), June 26, 1749.]

Whereas the Great & Generall Court of the the [sic] Province of the Massachusetts Bay in June Last, On the Petitions of Dunstable & Nottingham has Ordered that the Inhabitants of Groton and Nottingham, Which by Order of the s’d Court the 6th of June 1747 Were On Certain Conditions Annexed to s’d Dunstable & (Which Conditions not being Complyed with) be Annexed to s’d.  Dunstable to do duty & Receive priviledge there their neglect of Complyance notwithstanding, Unless the major part of the Inhabitants and ratable Estate belonging to the s’d.  Groton & Nottingham respectively Shall on or before the first day of September next in Writing under their hands Transmitt to the Secretarys Office their desire not to Continue so Incorporated With the town of Dunstable as afores’d.  Now therefore Wee the Subscribers Inhabitants of Groton & Nottingham Sett of as afores’d. do hereby Signifie Our desire not to Continue so Incorporated with the town of Dunstable as afores’d. but to be Sett at Liberty As tho that Order of Court had not ben passed

Dated the 10th day of July 1749

Inhabitants of Groton

  Timothy Read
  Joseph fletcher
  John Swallow
  Samuel Comings
  Benjamin Robbins
  Joseph Spalding iuner

Inhabitants of Nottingham

Samuell Gould Robert Fletcher Joseph perriaham Daken [Deacon?] iohn Collans Zacheus Spaulding and ten others

[Massachusetts Archives, cxv, 515.]

A manuscript plan of Dunstable, made by Joseph Blanchard, in the autumn of 1748, and accompanying these papers among the Archives (cxv, 519), has considerable interest for the local antiquary.

In the course of a few years some of these Groton signers reconsidered the matter, and changed their minds.  It appears from the following communication that the question of the site of the meeting-house had some influence in the matter:—­

Copyrights
Project Gutenberg
The Bay State Monthly — Volume 2, No. 1, October, 1884 from Project Gutenberg. Public domain.